So, now that the Xoom has flopped, can we finally agree that "tablet" means "iPad"?

Rather idealistic view isn't that? The point of any product is to make a profit. If no one buys the surface, it won't matter how intrinsically good it is, it will cease to exist

Very few tech products make money from day one. It usually takes a release or two. Windows 3.0, after all, was the first really successful Windows and Window 3.1 even more so. Nobody remembers WIndows 1.0 or Windows 2.0.

That said, you can still miss markets. The real question for the moment is volume more than profit. If Surface doesn't get into enough hands, it may never do. But, that's not a profit statement, rather a volume one for the next few years.

Excellent post. And not just tech products--tons of products. I can tell you have had lots of experience in industry.

There is no advantage in having the same software across multiple devices?

How would you expect software such as . . . Oh, I don't know, (Let's throw some shit out there) AutoCAD, CATIA, SolidWorks, MicroStation, AutoStudio etc. to scale and run effectively/efficiently on the 5 to 10-inch (I'll even give you 12-inch!) screens of phones/tablet devices? And if you custom-tailor to each form factor then you're bound to lose UI "consistency" at the very least.

To be clear, people were complaining about the small screen sizes *years ago*, and that's why these folks went to *desktops* (and get this: laptops/notebooks too) with larger, and larger screens.

I see little advantage in trying to maintain the same familiar UI/paradigm of the desktop, and trying to shoehorn it onto a tablet just because someone believes it's a Good Idea®.

The critics will be disappointed to discover that Surface Pro is in fact flying off the shelves, at the least the 128 GB version.

If it sounds too good to be true, just read the comments. It appears that of the 2,000 or so Best Buy and Staples stores, there may not have been a lot of inventory, as in none. Microsoft stores have been selling out, too, as well as online, but I have to wonder why more units weren't available.

I blame ineptitude, rather than a conspiracy to create Apple-like lines for a new product. It's kind of a shame, though. As Thurrott so glaringly obviously states, "they could have sold even more if they could have delivered more to stores." Certainly, a press release Monday citing a million units sold over the weekend could have put some real shine back on the already tarnished Surface brand.

Still, if demand actually is strong and Microsoft can get product to market, a flubbed launch won't matter. Still yet another opportunity missed, though.

Still amazed that the industry allows MS, Amazon and Samsung to simply not report tablet sales.

Do you have any idea the financial shitstorm that would ensue if Apple said "hey, we've decided just not to tell you how many iPads we sold this quarter"?

Ridiculous double standard.

Tell me how many iMacs Apple sold.

or PowerMacs

or Airs

or how about iPod "regular" vs. iPod Touch?

or minis vs. maxis?

As Hillary Clinton would say, What does it matter? Apple is the most profitable tech company on the planet with $140 billion in cash in reserves, and while they may not meet wallstreet expectations, the most recent quarter was a record breaker yet again. Nothing like missing the forest for the trees.

As Hillary Clinton would say, What does it matter? Apple is the most profitable tech company on the planet with $140 billion in cash in reserves, and while they may not meet wallstreet expectations, the most recent quarter was a record breaker yet again. Nothing like missing the forest for the trees.

Talk about missing the point. The Professor was complaining about other companies not telling how many tablets were sold, and the comparison was Apple.

And yet Apple is also not terribly forthcoming with the data. No breakdown of Minis (how could they get away with that???)...that is the point, The Professor is complaining about something that happens even with the company he was using for comparison.

And all the proof you need is the fact that there will be no penalty when MS refuses to reveal launch weekend sales numbers for the Surface Pro.

so? "Wall Street" doesn't care how Microsoft makes money, only that they do. If Windows and Server & Tools bankrolls the entire company, so be it. As has been said, Wall Street is not the Battlefront; they don't waste time with myopic bickering about consumer baubles vs. enterprise tools.

Quote:

What do you think would happen to Apple if they did the same for the next iPad launch?

They'd probably get hammered. Why? 'cos as of now, Apple is a one-trick pony. iOS devices are so core to the company that fumbling a launch could be crippling.

The anti-Microsoft cabal was out in force over the weekend, trying to quickly quell any reports of Microsoft success, however small. On Twitter, blogs and web sites, and in online forums and comments sections, these ne’ver-do-wells with too much time on their hands sought to undermine the hype of the Surface Pro launch with a blistering array of FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt).

Just awesome. It could only get better if Microsoft issued a press release Monday on the success of the Surface Pro launch without sales numbers. That would be Onion awesome.

The anti-Microsoft cabal was out in force over the weekend, trying to quickly quell any reports of Microsoft success, however small. On Twitter, blogs and web sites, and in online forums and comments sections, these ne’ver-do-wells with too much time on their hands sought to undermine the hype of the Surface Pro launch with a blistering array of FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt).

Just awesome. It could only get better if Microsoft issued a press release Monday on the success of the Surface Pro launch without sales numbers. That would be Onion awesome.

He has a point though.

Also, Hal Berenson points out that assuming the Surface RT has so far sold a million units and is thus considered a failure, why is the very cheap Nexus 4 which has also sold a million units (and took longer to do so) not being called a flop? Both devices are supply constrained after all.

There is certainly bias. People pretending there isn't aren't being very honest in my opinion.

I'd have hoped we'd have learned to wait for some numbers to come in before getting sensationalist about "sold out" claims again, whichever away we lean. The same holds for rumours of order slashing/bolstering too.

Also, Hal Berenson points out that assuming the Surface RT has so far sold a million units and is thus considered a failure, why is the very cheap Nexus 4 which has also sold a million units (and took longer to do so) not being called a flop? Both devices are supply constrained after all.

Comparisons to the N4 make no sense, because it's a bizarre sort of "lookey here what's possible" kind of product that is supply constrained on purpose, and likely makes no money for anybody (except maybe Qualcomm).

A better comparison for the Surface RT would be the Samsung Galaxy Tab, but unfortunately Samsung doesn't give numbers for the Tab.

Somewhat Ironically, Samsung actually did announce sales of the original Tab launched in September, 2010. In November, Samsung announced 600,000 Tabs sold, followed a month later by one million sold, and a prediction of 1.5 million by the end of that year. That was followed by the infamous "smooth" press conference and an admission that the sales were to channel, not consumers. The Apple v. Samsung trial revealed that in reality only 983,00 Tabs were sold in 2011. What I find fascinating is a company can mislead, if not fucking lie outright, about sales and face no sanctions. Maybe that's how they roll in the RoK.

Somewhat Ironically, Samsung actually did announce sales of the original Tab launched in September, 2010. In November, Samsung announced 600,000 Tabs sold, followed a month later by one million sold, and a prediction of 1.5 million by the end of that year. That was followed by the infamous "smooth" press conference and an admission that the sales were to channel, not consumers. The Apple v. Samsung trial revealed that in reality only 983,00 Tabs were sold in 2011. What I find fascinating is a company can mislead, if not fucking lie outright, about sales and face no sanctions. Maybe that's how they roll in the RoK.

Really? You're going to make this a thing about South Korea?

I guess it's not like companies in the United States ever lied about anything to anyone. It's not like anyone lied about mortgage rates and derivatives and bundled whatever and caused a GLOBAL RECESSION or anything.

In fairness, I agree with Carrotee on this, Microsoft do have a tendancy to crow about numbers when the numbers make them look good. Amazon, I'm not so sure about, I don't think they've ever released solid numbers and the Kindle has been dominant for a long time now.

It's impossible to evaluate the future performance of a company like Apple. Because there has never been a company like Apple. That's why I say comparing anybody to Apple is a fools errand. They are massive outliers.